Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sorry dx100uk   I have uploaded via the site now, I had trouble uploading it to the site before
    • Well I really don't know where to begin with this. I've spent hours trying to figure out what to put but it seems that every witness statement is different depending on the exact circumstances. I know that I shouldn't put all my cards on the table but I don't know which ones to hold back and which ones to get rid of altogether.   This is what I have so far...   I, XXX of XXX am the Defendant in this case. I make this statement in support of my defence again the Claimant, Civil Enforcement Ltd.   1.       CEL make it impossible for defendants to discuss PCNs with them or their representatives:              A.       On the 26th Nov 2018 I received an unexpected PCN from CEL. I immediately went onto their “Contact Us” page, which stated that operators are available to speak to during normal working hours (see appendix 1 - THIS IS JUST A COPY OF THEIR CONTACT US PAGE). I tried calling numerous times to discuss the matter but regardless of what time of day I called there was no option to speak to an operator, only an automated system to pay.              B.       When I received a debt collection notice from ZZPS (see appendix 2 - COPY OF LETTER) the letter instructed me to call them on 01932918916.                      14th Mar 2019 - I tried calling several times and have a call recording I can play for the court to show that it was impossible to speak to anyone. Instead I was played the following automated message: “The party’s call minder belonging to 01473478289 is full and can’t accept any more messages. Please try again later. Goodbye.” The call then hangs up.                     19th Mar 2019 - I tried again at several times throughout the day and this time a message played thanking me for calling ZZPS and asked me to hold. It then rang for 2 minutes before repeating the same message. This happened over and over again. I have two recording that I can play for the court showing this to be true, one that lasted 9 minutes and the other for 10 minutes before each time giving up.            It appears that there is some unreliable call routing in place meaning that I had no way of contacting CEL or ZZPS as they both advise.   2.       CEL failed to produce any of the documentation I requested in writing, which obstructs me from defending this case:             A.       On the 3rd Dec 2018 I completed CEL’s online Appeals Form (see appendix 3 for a saved copy of the submitted form - ATTACHED TO THIS POST). CEL responded (see appendix 4) but failed to answer any question, stating that GDPR prevented them from doing so.             B.       On the 14th Aug 2019 I sent them a CPR 31.14 Request letter (see appendix 5). CEL did not respond.   3.       According to Schedule 3, Part 1, Class 13 of The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007, only signage older than 10 years is deemed as having consent granted.   CEL has changed its signage 3 times within the last 10 years, which can be clearly seen from Google Street mapping images:            A.       2018 – Present: Signage stating 1hr free parking (appendix 6a)            B.       2012 – 2017: Signage stating 3hr free parking (appendix 6b)            C.       2008 – 2012: Signage stating 2hr free parking (appendix 6c)   CEL’s current signage was installed at some point during 2018 but according to Stockport Council’s online planning applications search system no planning permission was granted. I believe the signage has therefore been erected illegally, which makes it impossible to enter into a contract with them.   4.       CEL has also added legal costs to their claim, which is not recoverable within the Small Claims Court.   I believe that the following facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.   Have I made a complete balls-up of this or am I going in the right direction? I thought it might work in my favour if I try to show the judge that I made every reasonable effort to resolve this without going to court but CEL purposely make appeals as difficult as possible. Perhaps none of that matters. Not sure. 🤔 Appeal Text.pdf
    • images/posts removed . please do not post jpg picture images directly to a post . read upload and redact in jpg then convert using on of the listed websites there to convert to one multipage pdf only . that way only logged-in,registered and approved caggers are the only ones that can download and see them . else anyone can see them caggers or not. dx     dx    
    • This will be ok for you to offer the final 1 month's fee you should have paid :-   Dear Harlands,   I refer to my membership at [town/city] gym.   The DD mandate was cancelled after the June 2019 payment was made and this was notice of my intent to cancel the gym membership.   I now realise I should have left the DD Mandate open to pay a final month's fee for the notice period.   Please confirm your bank payment details and a reference so I can pay you the £xx.xx to end this matter. I will not pay any admin fees added by Harlands. I will only deal with this matter in writing, not by phone.   My offer is valid for 14 days only and will be withdrawn if you demand any higher amount.   Yours sincerely,
    • seems like your payment issue is not just your error      
  • Our picks

Vintagecat99

Hi to everyone .. Need help with Ruthbridge

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3605 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi everybody dealing with the Ruthbridge fantasy organisation their consumer credit licence expired june 14 2009 inform office of fair trading of their actions a formal complaint see oft web site. some of their tactics amount to fraud, deception and also false claims to be certificated bailiffs they are not.the more you all complain and the louder you complain the more chance we all have to beat Emmanuel Amissah the man behind ruthbridge,

Edited by 42man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi to everyone, very interesting information brigjacj, Thats something that the banking ombudsman obviously dont know as, they are dealing with my case involving Ruthbridge, on going since February this year, and yes I was subjected to vile threats, and verbal abuse by various people at Ruthbridge before contacting the Ombudsman, who have been very helpful, infact so helpful they have proved that no-one is entitled to chase my outstanding secured loan of 15 years ago.

Im so glad Ruthbridge have had there consumer credit licence expire, however I have to say that they are not exactly following the rules regarding debt recovery and Im guessing they will still be operating in debt recovery work.

Good luck to all who encounter Ruthbridge, My suggestion without hesitation would be to prepare a case for the ombudsman, as nothing will ever change unless people come forward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately there's a little more to the entry. The licence is shown as 'current' and a little visit to the main page gives an indication why that is so. The license is NOT 'lapsed' so is operational and fully valid.

 

Michael


When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is. (Oscar Wilde)

--I like to be helpful wherever possible however I'm not qualified in this field. I do consider carefully anything important (normally from personal experience) however please understand that any actions taken are at your own risk--

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Happy New Year. I have asked Mr.Tony Hetherington of THE FINANCIAL

Mail to investigate Ruthbridges activities and methods,and have sent him authorisation to do so.

Lets hope we can perhaps see some censure of their actions!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruthbridge has been shopped to the media before and each time they claim an administrative error is at fault. Hopefully Tony will see through the bovine material and give them the embarrassing publicity they so richly deserve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...